A Battle Master with the Martial Adept feat

[viaFAMILIAR]

I remember hearing something about the superiority die from the Martial Adept feat becoming a d8 if playing a BM. Is this correct? Or is it only upon gaining their 10th fighter level when the d6 changes? Does the order of gaining the feat/class feature matter?

[dragoeniex]

The errata published a handful of months back changed this feat so you gain 1d6 whether you have Superiority Dice from another source like Battle Master or not.

House ruling it to still match the other dice might not be out of the question, but it is a house rule now.

[Nagog]

Are you asking if taking the Martial Adept feat increases the superiority die by 1 if you already have them? I don't think it does. If anything, it simply adds another superiority die to your resources, similar to the 1st level spell slot added by Magic Initiate.

[viaFAMILIAR]

The errata published a handful of months back changed this feat so you gain 1d6 whether you have Superiority Dice from another source like Battle Master or not.

House ruling it to still match the other dice might not be out of the question, but it is a house rule now.

@Nagog

I think dragoeniex answered it. With the new errata, the superiority die from the Martial Adept feat will always and forever be a d6. It seems the bracketed portion of the second bullet has been removed, (this die is added to any superiority dice you have from another source).

A second question arises. Are the combat maneuvers learned from the feat allowed to be used with superiority dice from another source, and vice versa?

[Misterwhisper]

I can honestly say I have never seen anyone take it, ever, and Battlemaster are very popular here.

[LudicSavant]

I can honestly say I have never seen anyone take it, ever, and Battlemaster are very popular here.

The feat was errataed to make extra sure that nobody would take it. :smalltongue:

[DarkKnightJin]

The errata published a handful of months back changed this feat so you gain 1d6 whether you have Superiority Dice from another source like Battle Master or not.

House ruling it to still match the other dice might not be out of the question, but it is a house rule now.

That errata was dumb, and I will not be following it in my games. If a BM Fighter takes Martial Adept, they get another Superiority die of the same quality as they already posses. If they happen to be VHuman and pick it at 1st level for whatever reason, it's a d6 and turns into a d8 if they later decide to be a Battlemaster.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I can honestly say I have never seen anyone take it, ever, and Battlemaster are very popular here.

It's something my DM and I give away in our games as a result of training during downtime. I wouldn't recommend taking it on level up.

[Misterwhisper]

The feat was errataed to make extra sure that nobody would take it. :smalltongue:

Yeah kind of like weapon master.

Did they guys on the design team just say,

“well, we need one more feat so what do we have around?”

“How about a weapon proficiency feat?”

“But there are only 2 kinds of weapons to be proficient in the first place, and everyone has all the proficiencies they need.”

“Eh, make it a half feat?”

“Too good, just let them choose 4 weapons”

“Fine we will just make it at the end of the section, people won’t notice how bad it is.”

“I think we need something better.

“If we make it the last feat, we don’t have to copy paste anything and move it.”

“Oh, ok, print it up then.”

[Jerrykhor]

Wow what a dumb errata. Kind of like the errata that nerfs 4 element monk, to make sure nobody ever plays it.

[Waazraath]

Flabbergasted. Missed this. Why why why?! :smalleek:

[Chronos]

How is this "errata"? "Hey, guys, I just noticed that we accidentally made Martial Adept work the way it's obviously supposed to, by putting in a sentence that explicitly says that it works in that way. We'd better fix that."

It's one thing when you use the "errata" to make needed balance changes, like with Contagion. That's still not actually an erratum, but it makes sense, and they needed to do it. But Martial Adept was never overpowered.

[Zhorn]

Errata recognised and ignored.

I was already house ruling Martial Adept to be a bit better than by the book (2 dice, 2 maneuvers, feat can be stacked, subsequent applications grant 1 dice and 1 maneuver), so I'm not feeling any incentive to apply that d6 limitation. Granted I don't have a fighter in my group, so it's a non-issue anyway.

[firelistener]

How is this "errata"? "Hey, guys, I just noticed that we accidentally made Martial Adept work the way it's obviously supposed to, by putting in a sentence that explicitly says that it works in that way. We'd better fix that."

It's one thing when you use the "errata" to make needed balance changes, like with Contagion. That's still not actually an erratum, but it makes sense, and they needed to do it. But Martial Adept was never overpowered.

It's not Martal Adept, but the Battlemaster subclass, that is probably a bit too powerful. I have a guy playing one in my game right now, and he's started wiping the floor with a lot of monsters single-handedly since switching from his cleric. When I try to limit the short rests they get, the other players get a chance to shine, but he still outclasses them pretty easily with his extremely versatile toolkit and high burst damage.